Talk:Patrice Barnes

Latest comment: 4 months ago by UmbyUmbreon in topic Edit request on 10 February 2026

2025 result

edit

I'm not trying to start an edit war so I figure I should lay my opinion out here. At the moment, mail-in ballots haven't been fully counted, and media outlets such as the CBC are still waiting to announce the results for this riding. As such I don't believe it's appropriate to declare her defeated since, as it stands, she still is in the running. She very well could be defeated in the next few hours or days as the final results come in by which point I'd support changing the article to reflect that. Tagging @TimeToFixThis. Letsgetinreformation (talk) 17:09, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

See your talk page. TimeToFixThis | 🕒 17:12, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
As for your messsage to my talk page, credible sources do agree it's too close to call and official election results haven't been released by Elections Ontario. Letsgetinreformation (talk) 17:14, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Hi Letsgetinreformation,
I appreciate your engagement with these election related pages, and I’m sure your intentions are honest. That said, the CBC article you referenced mentions Ajax as a close race but does not indicate that the result is undecided or heading for a recount. A 331-vote lead is well above the 25-vote automatic recount threshold, and unless a legal challenge is filed, the result stands. Credible sources, as cited, have already called the race and the page for the her successor has already been created and reviewed. If you believe a result is still in question, please provide evidence of an official challenge rather than just a mention of a close race.
Thanks, TimeToFixThis | 🕒 17:28, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Hi, my edits have nothing to do with a recount. The source I referenced mentions there are mail-in ballots to be counted and thus it's currently too close to call. CBC doesn't consider Cerjanec to be elected as of now. The results could change in Barnes' favour. It's certainly more than "just mention of a close race".
Thanks, Letsgetinreformation (talk) 17:33, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Again, credible sources have called the race. Unless that happens - these results will stand. TimeToFixThis | 🕒 17:36, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Credible sources also consider the race too close to call. There is no consensus among credible sources on the election call. Letsgetinreformation (talk) 17:41, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
It's my understanding that if there are conflicting election calls from major media outlets we should wait for official results to become available, but I could be wrong on that. Letsgetinreformation (talk) 17:48, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Edit request on 10 February 2026

edit
Information Note: There is no need to add so many edit request templates, just the one is fine. Umby 🌕🐶 (talk) 22:17, 10 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Not done: your request appears to have been generated by a large language model. This draft has nonexistent references, and other references that fail verification, which indicate the changes could not have been reviewed by a human. Umby 🌕🐶 (talk) 22:17, 10 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hello Thank you for your response, I am not sure how to proceed, I don't know how to write source so to make the edits easier I popped it into chat gpt to write the source, so how do i add the information and which references failed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN2lXC2455U
https://counselpa.com/insights/patrice-barnes-joins-counsel-as-a-senior-advisor/
https://www.ontario.ca/orders-in-council/oc-11052025
https://www.pas.gov.on.ca/Home/Agency/590
https://www.pas.gov.on.ca/Home/Agency/629
https://www.pas.gov.on.ca/Home/Agency/629
https://byblacks.com/news/item/3646-they-made-history-the-firsts-who-don-t-want-to-be-the-last https://thecaribbeancamera.com/sometimes-it-gets-very-heated-in-the-house-patrice-barnes/#:~:text=By%20The%20Caribbean%20Camera%20Inc,by%20The%20Caribbean%20Camera%20Inc https://www.revparlcan.ca/en/reaching-a-critical-mass-a-roundtable-with-black-parliamentarians/
https://www.thestar.com/politics/provincial/pc-patrice-barnes-elected-in-ajax/article_f994903f-8dc6-5f45-81f8-61b417512410.html https://www.durhamregion.com/politics/provincial-elections/historic-win-for-ajaxs-newest-mpp-patrice-barnes/article_9a329f46-7117-5c4b-8d8c-8f434b6ff6b9.html#:~:text=Attention,Board%20trustee%20after%20the%20election.
https://www.gg.ca/en/honours/recipients/5431-153132
Uncategorized | Cultural Expressions
https://blackdiamondawards.ca/recipients/#2023 ~2026-93463-3 (talk) 15:27, 11 February 2026 (UTC)Reply
The problem is that the material within a good chunk of the citations that you've included have nothing to do with the text in your edit suggestions, and therefore are not verifiable. For example, in the early life/education suggestions, the citations included don't mention the claims you make at all, and references 5, 6 and 11 are just text that can't be used as a citation for verifiability. The issue with writing changes to articles with services using large language models like ChatGPT is, more often than not, it does not take the wider context of a list of links you provide it into account. This is why you must carefully review its output before including it on Wikipedia, especially on a BLP article. I suggest taking a read of WP:LLM, an essay on using LLMs to edit Wikipedia. Umby 🌕🐶 (talk) 22:10, 11 February 2026 (UTC)Reply